Board Thread:Wiki discussion/@comment-3427635-20160329181932/@comment-1888015-20160427013413: Difference between revisions
imported>Slate Vesper Created page with "It's a shame I missed this vote on account of being inactive, because in all fairness, I would have voted "No". While I know it's a gesture of inclusiveness, to me it seems li..." |
imported>Slate Vesper No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
It's a shame I missed this vote on account of being inactive, because in all fairness, I would have voted "No". While I know it's a gesture of inclusiveness, to me it seems like the idea of an "LGBT/Q characters" category is treading on complex ground, and makes me question the necessity of it all really. | It's a shame I missed this vote on account of being inactive, because in all fairness, I would have voted "No". While I know it's a gesture of inclusiveness, to me it seems like the idea of an "LGBT/Q characters" category is treading on complex ground, and makes me question the necessity of it all really. | ||
I say this because it seems like labelling one character for their sexuality means we have to further label ''every'' character for their sexuality (e.g. "Heterosexual characters") just to fill the void, and then it prompts the question if we're going to end up with the notion of labelling the most trivial of things to characters such as eye colour, gender (i.e. "Male/Female characters"), and living status (deceased/alive), like I see on other wikis for anime characters | I say this because it seems like labelling one character for their sexuality means we have to further label ''every'' character for their sexuality (e.g. "Heterosexual characters") just to fill the void, and then it prompts the question if we're going to end up with the notion of labelling the most trivial of things to characters such as eye colour, gender (i.e. "Male/Female characters"), and living status (deceased/alive), like I see on other wikis for anime characters for instance, and I would have honestly thought the Assassin's Creed Wiki would have distanced itself from that approach in favor of keeping it concise. | ||
Latest revision as of 03:35, 27 April 2016
It's a shame I missed this vote on account of being inactive, because in all fairness, I would have voted "No". While I know it's a gesture of inclusiveness, to me it seems like the idea of an "LGBT/Q characters" category is treading on complex ground, and makes me question the necessity of it all really.
I say this because it seems like labelling one character for their sexuality means we have to further label every character for their sexuality (e.g. "Heterosexual characters") just to fill the void, and then it prompts the question if we're going to end up with the notion of labelling the most trivial of things to characters such as eye colour, gender (i.e. "Male/Female characters"), and living status (deceased/alive), like I see on other wikis for anime characters for instance, and I would have honestly thought the Assassin's Creed Wiki would have distanced itself from that approach in favor of keeping it concise.